TWI497858B - Method and system for detecting conflicts between outage requests and power supply guarantee requests in power grid - Google Patents

Description

Method and system for detecting a conflict between a power outage request and a power save request in a power grid

The present invention relates generally to power grids and, more particularly, to a method and system for detecting a collision between a power outage request and a power save request in a power grid.

As the electrification of the entire society progresses and the marketization of the power industry accelerates, we are increasingly dependent on electricity. The power grid is a key component of the power system and functions to transfer large amounts of power. In order to transmit power more reliably and efficiently, the concept of "smart grid" has been proposed in recent years. Based on the so-called smart grid, a large number of new technologies are applied to power generation, power transmission, power distribution, power usage, etc., and finally complete the optimization of the power grid, and also achieve energy savings and emissions reduction. Intelligent outage planning management is an important part of smart grids, which helps manage grid blackouts more efficiently and has been seen as an important topic in smart grids.

Grid companies typically need to handle power supply guarantee requests (PSGR) and outage requests (OR). For example, to perform routine maintenance or technical updates/upgrades, or to coordinate with municipal modifications, grid companies need to stop or cut power from certain electrical devices to ensure worker safety. These requests for shutting off power supply for the power device are referred to as power outage requests. On the other hand, grid companies need to guarantee power supplies for some important events or users. Important events (for example) include college entrance exams, important meetings, and more. Important users (for example) include government departments, special industrial users (for example, steel factories). These requests for securing the power supply for the power user are referred to as power save requests.

Power devices associated with power outage requests include transformers, power lines, circuit breakers, bus bars, secondary devices, and the like. Power outage requests are usually about power conservation for organizations and events, but such organizations and events are associated with fixed buildings or facilities. Therefore, the power device associated with the power conservation request primarily represents a distribution transformer associated with the building or facility required to request power conservation. As long as the power of the corresponding distribution transformer is not cut off, the power supply to one or more buildings or facilities associated with the distribution transformer can be guaranteed.

In practice, PSGR and OR often have conflicts. The grid company needs to determine if implementing the OR will cause a conflict with the PSGR and adjust the mode of operation to ensure the PSGR as much as possible.

An example of a conflict between PSGR and OR that occurs in the grid is shown in Figure 1. In Fig. 1, the hexagon represents the user, the straight line represents the power line, and the user C is the user who proposes the PSGR. When the line L1 is maintained, the power supply of the line L1 should be cut off. In addition, since the line L2 and the line L1 are geographically intersected with each other, in order to ensure the safety when the maintenance line L1 is executed before the actual maintenance, the power supply of the line L2 must be cut off at the same time. On the other hand, due to the power outage of the line L2, it can be determined from Fig. 1 that the power supply of both the user B and the user C will be cut off, which obviously causes a conflict with respect to the PSGR of the user C.

Currently, the grid company stores the received OR and PSGR in the grid management information system. Figure 2 shows an example of all of these PSGRs and ORs in a month, with each request lasting for a period of time. In Figure 2, there are a plurality of ORs, and according to such ORs, for example, a power outage needs to be performed on line 5114 from day 1 to day 5, and a power outage is performed on the 500 kV bus bar from day 4 to day 8, since From the 21st to the 25th day, power failure is performed on the No. 2 main transformer. There are also six PSGRs in Figure 2. These PSGRs include user power conservation, conference power conservation, and event security, each of which lasts for several days. Although the time associated with OR and PSGR in Figure 2 is in days, it is obvious that the time associated with such requests may also be in hours and minutes. For example, an OR or PSGR can last exactly from 20:05 on day 1 to 8:30 on day 3. It is determined whether the power failure according to the power device executed according to the OR may cause a conflict with the PSGR based on the time point, which has become one of the problems that the grid company should solve.

Traditionally, conflicts are detected manually. The grid dispatcher needs to manually study the grid topology and determine if an OR will cause a conflict with a PSGR. This manual detection is based on the grid topology. As the electrification progresses and the development of the power industry accelerates, the scope of the grid is growing. As a result, grid topologies are becoming more and more complex. Therefore, manual detection takes a lot of time. In addition, since the determination is made manually, reliability is not guaranteed and some conflicts may be missed.

In addition, there is system assisted detection. System-assisted detection is based on a management information system (MIS) that uses a simple name match to check if a PSGR device is in an OR device. That is, the system assists in detecting whether the name of the PSGR device is in the name list of the OR device. If the name of the PSGR device is in the name list of the OR device, a collision is detected. This system assisted detection does not consider the grid topology. Therefore, since the power outage range is not limited to the power-off device associated with the OR, it extends from the power-off device until it reaches the range of the switch (or terminal or ground node). Therefore, the actual power outage range includes the power device that is not in the name list of the power outage device described above. In this case, even if a PSGR device is not in the power outage device name list, it can be in the actual power outage range. Therefore, the results of the prior art assisted detection of this system are not reliable.

The manual detection in the prior art does not consider the geographical relationship of the power device, and the system-assisted detection in the prior art does not consider the geographical relationship of the power device, and does not consider the topology of the power grid.

In order to reliably and effectively detect the conflict between PSGR and OR in the power grid, a well-designed method is needed. This method not only considers the topology of the power grid, but also considers the geographical relationship of the power devices in order to provide a reliable detection result.

Additionally, manual detection in the prior art operates in a basic mode of operation. This mode of operation represents one mode in which the grid is operated, in which the grid operates in accordance with a combination of switching states of the respective switches located in the grid. When manual detection detects a collision in the basic mode of operation, it can only report the conflict. At present, a method and system are also contemplated. If a collision is detected, the method and system can change the mode of operation and continue to detect collisions in the new mode of operation and attempt to find an optimized conflict-free mode of operation.

In order to solve the above problems, it is a primary object of the present invention to provide a method and system for detecting a collision between an OR and a PSGR in a power grid. The method and system not only considers the topology of the power grid, but also considers the geographical relationship of the power devices in order to provide a reliable detection result. Additionally, if a conflict is detected, the method and system can change the mode of operation and continue to detect collisions in the new mode of operation and attempt to find an optimized conflict-free mode of operation.

According to one aspect of the present invention, a system for detecting a collision between a PSGR and an OR in a power grid is provided, the system comprising: a companion power failure analysis device for receiving a device including an OR a first power outage device group, and determining a second power outage device group by using geographic information of the device in the power grid, the second power outage device group including the device and the need and located in the first power outage device group a power-off device with power failure in the first power-off device group; a power-down range determining device that uses topology information located in the power grid to determine a power outage range, wherein all of the second power outage device groups are located The devices may be powered down by the range; and a collision detecting device for receiving a power saver group including the device associated with the PSGR, and determining whether each device in the power save device group is included in the power grid In the power outage range.

According to another aspect of the present invention, a method for detecting a collision between a PSGR and an OR in a power grid is provided, the method comprising: receiving a first power outage device group and a power protection device group, wherein The first power outage device group includes an OR related device and the power protection device group includes a PSGR related device; determining, by using geographic information of the device located in the power grid, a second power outage device group, the second power outage device group including a device located in the first power outage device group and a power failure device that needs to be powered off together with the device in the first power outage device group; using topology information in the power grid to determine a power outage range, wherein the second All devices in the power outage device group can perform power outage in the range; and detect whether each device in the power conservation device group is included in the power outage range of the power grid to determine whether there is a conflict between the PSGR and the OR .

Based on the above methods and systems, automatic detection can be accomplished and the efficiency of collision detection can be greatly improved. In addition, the above method and system not only considers the topology of the power grid, but also considers the geographical relationship of the power devices in order to provide a reliable detection result. Therefore, the user's satisfaction with the power grid is improved. Moreover, the above described systems and methods further have the ability to find an optimized conflict-free mode of operation.

The inventors found that because there is a complex relationship between PSGR and OR, in order to find a conflict between PSGR and OR, many factors should be considered. For example, at least three factors should be considered: grid topology connectivity, geographic relationship of electrical devices, and chronological order of PSGR and OR.

For example, the time sequence of PSGR and OR can be stored and represented in the form of a table as illustrated in FIG. Of course, this chronological order can be represented by other data structures.

The topological connectivity of the grid represents a topological relationship between power devices such as power supplies, lines, bus bars, transformers, switches, ring main units, and the like. In order to find the power outage range corresponding to an OR, the topology connectivity of the grid must be considered.

The geographic relationship of electrical installations includes, but is not limited to, the same pole, same position, and intersection. The same pole relationship represents the relationship between parallel crossings across the same pole. The same position relationship represents the relationship between electrical devices in the warehouse that are constructed to accommodate electrical devices located at transformer stations or other locations. Cross-relationships represent relationships between lines that are geographically intersected. The reason for considering the above three geographical relationships is that if one of the lines on one pole requires maintenance while maintaining the electric device, the power supply for the line and other lines on the pole should be cut off to ensure safety. Similarly, if one of the power units in a warehouse requires maintenance, the power supply to the power unit and other power units in the chamber should be cut off. If one of the lines intersecting each other requires maintenance, the power supply for the line and another line with which it intersects should be cut off.

Specific embodiments of the invention are explained in detail below with reference to the drawings. In the following description, the term "power outage range/grid power outage range" represents a group of power devices that are actually powered down in a particular mode of operation. This group is different from the group of devices that need to be powered down according to OR. The former is obtained by expanding the latter. Since the above operation mode represents a mode in which the power grid is operated, the power grid is combined in such a mode according to one of the switching states of the respective switches in the power grid, so a "power outage range" is actually one of the individual switches in the power grid. The switch state combination is corresponding.

Referring to Figure 3, the present invention provides a method for detecting a collision between PSGR and OR in a power grid. Figure 3 illustrates a process flow 300 used in the first embodiment of the present invention, which includes the following steps:

Step 310: Receive an OR device group and a PSGR device group.

Step 320: Using geographic information to determine a power outage device group, the power outage device group further including a power outage device.

Step 330: Use the topology information of the power grid to determine the power outage range.

Step 340: Detect whether there is a conflict.

Note that the processing flow 300 should be performed at some point in time, including the power-on start timing, the power-on end timing, and the power-off start timing and the power-down end timing between the power-on start timing and the power-on end timing. In this way, taking the PSGR in FIG. 2 as an example, that is, "user PSGR1", the processing flow 300 needs to be executed at the following time points: PSGR "user PSGR1" start timing and end timing, OR "line 5114" The end sequence, the end sequence of the OR "500 kV secondary bus", the start sequence of the OR "500 kV bus", and the start sequence of the OR "No. 2 power line/2 shared standby transformer". However, the above-described execution timing is not necessary, and the processing flow 300 may be performed once a day or every hour, and the execution timing in the processing flow 300 is not limited.

Hereinafter, in order to explain the processing flow 300 in FIG. 3, reference is made to FIG. Figure 4 shows a schematic diagram of a simple grid. It should be understood that the grid in the real world is more complex than the grid in Figure 4, and is provided for ease of understanding of the principles of the invention, and should not be considered as limit.

In Figure 4, T1 represents the main transformer, S1, S2, S3, S4 represent switches, B1, B2, B3 represent busbars, L1, L2 represent lines, and X, Y, Z represent users (ie, with actual use) There is an associated distribution transformer), wherein the main transformer T1 is connected to one of the upper power lines.

In the following, the process flow 300 of the present invention will be described in detail in connection with an example of a power grid in FIG.

Step 310: Receive a power outage device group and a PSGR device group.

When the process flow 300 begins to be executed at a certain point in time, for example, the power outage device group and the PSGR device group are received or obtained from the grid management information system. The respective PSGR and OR systems are stored in the grid management information system. The PSGR and OR are stored in the Grid Management Information System in the form of, for example, the table shown in Figure 2. Of course, it can be stored in other data structures, such as in a database. As mentioned above, each request for PSGR and OR involves a time period. Obviously only some PSGRs and ORs are valid requests that should be considered, and the time points at which these PSGRs and ORs execute process flow 300 fall into their time periods. Referring to Fig. 2, for example, when the process flow 300 is executed on the 28th day, only the OR "5108 line" and the PSGR "user PSGR 3" need to be considered. Therefore, in the following, PSGR and OR represent only requests that are valid when performing the method of the present invention.

The power outage set includes a device associated with the OR. The PSGR device group includes devices associated with PSGR. Although only the name of the PSGR is listed in the PSGR portion of Figure 2, for each PSGR, the device associated with the PSGR is a particular distribution transformer.

Suppose there is a situation in which the line L1 in Figure 4 needs to be maintained (OR) on a certain day, but the power supply to the distribution transformer Z (PSGR) needs to be guaranteed that day, because the distribution transformer Z is associated with a university that plans to take the test that day. . In this case, the power failure device group received from the power grid management information system is {L1}, and the PSGR device group received from the power grid management information system is {Z}. The above illustrations of these conditions are only intended to simplify the description, but in practice there may be multiple ORs and PSGRs at the same point in time.

Step 320: Using geographic information to determine a power outage device group, the power outage device group further including a power outage device.

After the power outage device group is obtained, the geographic information of the device in the power grid is used to determine the accompanying power outage device, and the accompanying power outage device is also added to the power outage device group.

In the following, geographic information will be briefly explained. Geographic information is stored in an existing grid geographic information system, which is part of the grid management information system. The geographic information may be the geographic coordinates of the respective electrical devices and may also be the geographic relationship of the electrical devices obtained after processing the geographic coordinates of the electrical devices.

For example, for a tie relationship, see the route across the example in Figure 5A. The many-to-many geographic relationship is expressed as follows: L1 {P1, P2, P3}, L2 {P1, P2, P4}, P1 {L1, L2}, P2 {L1, L2}, P3 {L1}, P4 {L2}. The above geographical relationship indicating line L1 is spanned on the rod P1, the rod P2, the rod P3, and the line L2 is spanned on the rod P1, the rod P2, the rod P4, and the line L1 and the line are spanned on the rod P1 and the rod P2. L2, across line L1 on pole P3 and line L2 across pole P4.

Similarly, regarding the same position relationship, see Figure 5B, the many-to-one geographic relationship is expressed as follows: S1 {R1}, S2 {R1}, K1 {R1}, K2 {R1}, R1 {S1, S2, K1, K2}. The relationship indicates that the switch S1, the switch S2 and the blade K1, and the blade K2 are in the bin R1, and the bin R1 has a switch S1, a switch S2, and a knife K1 and a knife K2.

Similarly, regarding the cross-relationship, see Figure 5C, the many-to-many geographic relationship is indicated as follows: L1 {C1, C2}, L2 {C1}, L3 {C2}, C1 {L1, L2}, C2 {L1, L3}. The above relationship indicates that there are two intersections C1 and C2 in L1, an intersection C1 in L2, and an intersection C2 in L3. The intersection C1 is formed by the line L1 and the line L2, and the intersection C2 is borrowed. It is formed by the line L1 and the line L3.

For example, the above geographic relationships are stored in a repository of geographic information systems in the form of a relational table.

Returning now to this process flow 300 is explained. In step 320, regarding each device in the original power outage device list, if the device is a line, perform the same-pole accompanying power failure analysis and cross-concomitant power failure analysis, and if the device is a transformer device, execute the same position With power outage analysis. The same-bar accompanying power outage analysis, cross-concomitant power outage analysis, and the same-station accompanying power outage analysis will be described in detail below.

Same pole with power outage analysis

1. Regarding the current device (in this case, a line) in the power outage device group, the bar list of the line is obtained based on the geographic information. For example, regarding the case in FIG. 5A, it is assumed that the original power failure device group is {a, b, c, L1} (where a, b, c are other devices for power failure) and L1 is in the power failure device group. The current device, here based on the geographical relationship L1 {P1, P2, P3} obtains the list of poles {P1, P2, P3}.

2. With regard to each of the rods in the rod list (in the case of Figure 5A, ie P1, P2, P3), the lines across the respective rods can be found. For example, regarding the case in FIG. 5A, the line L1 and the line L2 are based on the geographical relationship P1. {L1, L2}, P2 {L1, L2}, P3 {L1} to find.

3. Add the found line to the power outage unit. For example, for the case in Fig. 5A, a power failure device group {a, b, c, L1, L1, L2} is obtained.

4. Remove the repeating elements in the new power outage set. For example, for the case in FIG. 5A, a power failure device group {a, b, c, L1, L2} is obtained, where L2 is one of L1 with a power failure device.

Cross-contained power outage analysis

1. Regarding the current device (in this case, a line) in the power outage device group, a list of intersections of the lines is obtained. For example, regarding the case in FIG. 5C, assuming that the original power failure device group is {a, b, c, L1} and L1 is the current device in the power failure device group, the geographic relationship L1 can be used. {C1, C2} gets the list of intersections {C1, C2}.

2. With regard to each of the intersections in the cross-point list (in the case of Figure 5C, i.e., C1, C2), the line formed at each intersection can be found. For example, regarding the situation in Figure 5C, according to the geographical relationship C1 {L1, L2}, C2@{L1, L3} obtains the line L1, the line L2, and the line L3.

3. Add the found lines to the power outage unit. For example, regarding the case in FIG. 5C, a power failure device group {a, b, c, L1, L1, L2, L3} is obtained.

4. Remove the repetitive elements in the new power outage device group. For example, regarding this case in FIG. 5C, a power failure device group {a, b, c, L1, L2, L3} is obtained, where L2 and L3 are the associated power-off devices of L1.

Same warehouse with power outage analysis

1. Regarding the current device (in this case, a transformer device) in the power outage device group, the bin of the device is obtained based on the geographic information. For example, regarding the case in FIG. 5B, assuming that the original power failure device group is {a, b, c, S1} and S1 is the current device in the power failure device group, the geographic relationship S1 may be used. {R1} gets the bin R1.

2. With regard to the acquired bin (in the case of Figure 5B, ie R1), the electrical device in the bin can be found. For example, regarding the situation in Figure 5B, the guillotine knife is based on the geographical relationship R1 {S1, S2, K1, K2} find the switch S1, the switch S2, and the knife K1 and the knife K2.

3. Add the found device to the power outage device group. For example, regarding the case in FIG. 5B, a power failure device group {a, b, c, S1, S1, S2, K1, K2} is obtained.

4. Remove the repetitive elements in the new power outage device group. For example, regarding the case in FIG. 5B, a power failure device group {a, b, c, S1, S2, K1, K2} is obtained, wherein S2, K1, K2 are the accompanying power-off devices of S1.

After performing the above processing for each device in the original power outage device group, the final power outage device group is obtained. The final blackout device set includes the devices in the original power outage device group and the associated power outage devices that need to be disconnected with the devices in the original power outage device group.

Now come back to the example in Figure 4. It is assumed that the line L1 and the line L2 have the same rod relationship, that is, the rod traversed by the line L1 and the rod traversed by the line L2 have the same rod. Regarding the device L1 in the original power failure device group, the lever can find the line L2 having the same pole relationship with L1 according to the above-mentioned co-bar power failure analysis, and the line L2 is one of the L1 with the power failure device. Therefore, with regard to the example in FIG. 4, after performing step 320, the final power failure device group is {L1, L2}.

Step 330: Use the topology information of the power grid to determine the power outage range.

First, after obtaining the final power outage device group, a search from the device is performed based on the topology of the power grid for each device in the final power outage device group. If the device is a line, the search continues until a switch or terminal is found; if the device is a transformer device, the search continues until a switch or a ground node is found. The search may be a depth-first search or a breadth-first search, preferably a breadth-first search. The topology information of the power grid is the connection relationship of devices in the power grid, and the information is basic information in the power grid management information system.

A switch group is obtained by the above search. For example, regarding the case in FIG. 4, the final power failure device group is {L1, L2}. The search begins at L1, along the topology connection, and the switch S1 is available. The search starts from L2 and is performed along the topology connection, and switch S2 and switch S3 are available.

In the present embodiment, an operation mode in which all of the search switches (S1, S2, S3 in Fig. 4) are turned off is preset to ensure that all of the devices in the final power failure device group are powered off.

Secondly, in the operating mode (basic mode of operation) in which all of the search switches have been turned off, the grid blackout range is determined by the color rendering algorithm in the graph theory, which can cause all devices in the final power outage group to be powered down. The color rendering algorithm in graph theory is a well-known algorithm. Based on the topology of the grid and the current mode of operation (switch state combination), the first color shading is performed along the connection path with respect to the device connected to any of the power supplies, and the second color shading is performed with respect to other devices. . Finally, the portion of the grid that is colored with the second color is the power outage range. Since the shading algorithm is a well-known algorithm in one of the technical fields, its detailed description is omitted here.

By performing the shading algorithm, in the operation mode in which the switch S1, the switch S2, and the switch S3 are all turned off, the power failure range of the grid in FIG. 4 is {L1, L2, B2, B3, S3, X, Y. ,Z}. Since one of the ends of the switch S1 and the switch S2 is electrically connected to the bus bar B1, the coloring algorithms S1 and S2 are not included in the power-off range.

Step 340: Detect whether there is a conflict.

After determining the power outage range, detection is performed for each device located in the group of power conservation devices to determine whether the device is included in the power outage range to determine if there is a collision between PSGR and OR.

Regarding the example in FIG. 4, the power-protecting device group is {Z}, and the power-off range obtained by the processing of steps 310 to 330 is {L1, L2, B2, B3, S3, X, Y, Z}. . If any device in the power saver group is included in the power outage range of the power grid, then a collision is detected. Here, the device Z in the power-protecting device group is in the power-off range, so that there is a collision between the PSGR and the OR at the current time point.

After completing the process flow 300, when a conflict is detected, for example, an alert can be issued, and then the dispatcher can manually adjust the power outage plan to avoid the conflict. On the other hand, if no conflict is detected, the switch found in step 330 (the example in FIG. 4, ie, S1, S2, S3) is closed at the scheduled timing by remote control, according to The grid is out of power to complete the power outage so that a fully automatic control is completed.

Referring now to Figure 6, Figure 6 illustrates a process flow 600 for use in a second embodiment of the present invention. The process flow 600 in FIG. 6 is substantially the same as the process flow 300 in FIG. 3, and the process of step 610, step 620, and step 640 in the process flow 600 and the step 310, step 320, and step in the process flow 300 are performed. The procedure for 340 is identical. The timing of executing process flow 600 is also the same as the sequence of executing process flow 300. The difference between process flow 600 and process flow 300 is that process flow 600 further includes step 650, and step 630 in process flow 600 is different from step 330 in process flow 300 except for the first operation.

The processing flow 600 in Fig. 6 is explained below with reference to Fig. 7. On the basis of Fig. 4, Fig. 7 adds a main transformer T2, a bus bar B4, a switch S5 and a switch S6, wherein the upper portion of the main transformer T2 is also connected to the power supply line. The remainder of the grid example in Figure 7 is identical to the grid example in Figure 4.

The process flow 600 of the present invention will be explained in detail below in connection with the grid example in FIG.

It is assumed that in step 610, the power failure device group {L1} and the power conservation device group {Z} are received in the same manner as the first embodiment.

In step 620, the power outage results in a final power outage set {L1, L2} as in step 320, where L2 is one of L1 with a power outage.

When step 630 is performed for the first time, the procedure as in step 330 is performed. Referring to Figure 7, the search begins at L1, along the topology connection, and switch S1 is available. The search starts from L2 and is performed along the topology connection, and switch S2 and switch S3 are available. When executed for the first time, it is preset to turn off one of the search modes (S1, S2, S3 in Fig. 4). In addition, it is assumed that in the example of Fig. 7, when the process flow 600 is executed, the switch S5 and the switch S6 are also turned off. The shading algorithm is executed in an operation mode in which all of the switches S1, S2, S3, S5, and S6 are turned off to obtain a power failure range {L1, L2, B2, B3, B4, S3, S6, X, Y, Z}.

In step 640, since the device Z in the power-protecting device group is in the power-down range {L1, L2, B2, B3, B4, S3, S6, X, Y, Z}, it is detected that there is a collision.

In this case, an alarm is issued, and then the process flow proceeds to step 650. In step 650, the method attempts to change the mode of operation of the grid based on status information of the switches in the grid. In detail, the method attempts to turn on the switch in the power grid except the switch S1, the switch S2, and the switch S3 to reduce the power failure range.

The procedure is based on the fact that there are usually some switches in the grid that are off, and that these switches are off due to reliability requirements of the grid or other reasons. In the example of Fig. 7, it is necessary to ensure that the switch S1, the switch S2, and the switch S3 are in a closed state to ensure safety when the line L1 is maintained, but turning on the switch in the closed state (for example, S5, S6) will lower the power failure range to The power protection device may be excluded from the power outage range and simultaneously satisfy the PSGR or OR.

In step 650, the mode of operation is changed, that is, the switching states of switch S5 and switch S6 are changed. After changing the operation mode, the process flow proceeds to step 630. In step 630, the shading algorithm is executed in a new mode of operation to obtain a new power outage range. Then, in step 640, it is determined whether each device in the group of power conservation devices is included in the changed power grid outage range. Steps 630 through 650 are repeated until a grid power outage range is found such that each device located in the group of power savers is not included in the grid power outage range, or until all switch state combinations are exhausted.

With regard to the power grid example in FIG. 7, assume that in step 650, the states of switch S5 and switch S6 are in a state of being closed from S5 and S6, changing to a state in which S5 is off and S6 is on, and then in subsequent step 630 In the operation mode, a power outage range {L1, L2, B2, B3, B4, S3, S6, X, Y, Z} is obtained, and the power outage range is the same as the original power outage range, so it still conflicts with the PSGR. .

Then, in the next cycle, it is assumed that in step 650, the states of switch S5 and switch S6 are turned off from S5 and S6 is turned on, one state is changed to S5 is turned on, and S6 is turned off, and then in a subsequent step 630, based on the The operation mode obtains a power outage range {L1, L2, B2, B3, S3, X, Y, Z}, and although the power outage range is smaller than the original power outage range, it still conflicts with the PSGR.

Then, assuming that in step 650, the states of S5 and S6 are off from S5 and one of the states of S6 is changed to a state in which S5 and S6 are in the on state, and then in a subsequent step 630, a power outage range is obtained based on the operation mode { L1, L2, B2, X, Y}. In a subsequent step 640, it is determined that there is no conflict. Based on the determination, the remote control is performed at the planned timing such that the switch S1, the switch S2, the switch S3 are set to the off state, and the switch S5, the switch S6 are set to the on state. As such, not only the PSGR is satisfied, but also the OR is satisfied. Accordingly, the present invention provides the ability to search for an optimized conflict-free mode of operation when a conflict is found.

If after a plurality of cycles, in addition to the switches that must be turned off (in the example of Figure 7, ie, S1, S2, S3), all possible combinations of switch states in step 650 are tested but no conflicts are found. In operation mode, flow 600 ends. In this case, the grid dispatcher manually adjusts the power outage plan to avoid conflicts.

Figure 8 illustrates a collision detection system 800 in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention. The collision detection system 800 is configured to detect a collision between the PSGR and the OR in the power grid, and includes a companion power failure analysis device 810, a power failure range determining device 820, and a collision detection device 830.

Figure 8 also illustrates a power protection information system, a maintenance management system, a grid geographic information system, and an equipment management system. These four systems are part of the existing grid management information system. The power protection information system manages and stores information related to PSGR. The maintenance management system manages and stores information related to the OR. The grid geographic information system manages and stores geographic information of electrical devices stored in the electrical grid. The equipment management system manages and stores topology information of the power grid. Although these four systems are shown in four separate modules in the drawings, those skilled in the art will appreciate that such modules can be combined to form one, two or three modules. Any combination of hardware and software can be used by the four systems as long as they provide PSGR, OR, geographic system information, and topology information. For example, the data of the four systems can be stored in the same database, and the conflict detection system of the present invention can obtain all necessary information from the database. Therefore, the module partitioning of the prior art grid management information system in FIG. 8 should not be considered as limiting the invention.

In FIG. 8, the collision detection system 800 includes a companion power failure analysis device 810, a power failure range determining device 820, and a collision detection device 830.

The companion power failure analysis device 810 receives, from the grid management information system (maintenance management system), a power failure device group including one of the devices related to the OR, and uses the power management information system (the grid geographic information system) to obtain the power grid. The geographic information of the device is determined to further include a power outage device group that is associated with the power outage device. The new power outage set includes a device received from the original power outage set and a companion power outage; the companion power outage is a device that requires power to be cut off with the device in the original power outage set. The decision procedure of the power failure device group is executed by the accompanying power failure analysis device 810, which is the same as the program executed in the above step 320, and thus the repeated description thereof is omitted here.

The power outage range determining device 820 uses topology information of the power grid obtained from the power grid management information system (equipment management system) to determine a power outage range, wherein all of the devices in the power outage group are determined by the power outage analysis device 810 Can be in a power outage. The determination procedure of the grid blackout range is performed by the power failure range determining means 820, which is the same as the program executed in the above step 330, and thus the repeated description thereof is omitted here. The grid blackout procedure is determined by the power outage decision determining device 820 based on a mode of operation that is turned off by utilizing all of the searched switches based on the topology, starting from the power down device, see the search explained in step 330.

The conflict detecting device 830 receives the power-protecting device group including the device related to the PSGR from the power grid management information system (the power-saving information system), and determines whether each device in the power-protecting device group is included in the The power outage range determines the power outage range determined by the device 820.

When the conflict detection device 830 determines that there is a conflict, for example, an alarm signal is issued, and then the power outage is manually adjusted by the grid dispatcher to avoid the conflict. On the other hand, if the conflict detection device 830 determines that there is no conflict, the system 800 can send a control signal and perform remote control on the searched switch at the scheduled timing to turn off all of the switches, and then according to the grid. The power outage range performs a power outage so that a fully automatic control is completed.

Figure 9 illustrates a conflict detection system 900 in accordance with another embodiment of the present invention. In FIG. 9, the conflict detection system 900 includes a companion power failure analysis device 910, a power failure range determining device 920, and a collision detection device 930. The companion power failure analysis device 910 has the same function as the power failure analysis device 810 in FIG. 8, and the power failure range determining device 920 and the collision detecting device 930 and the power failure range determining device 820 and the collision detecting device in FIG. The 830 has a similar function. The rest of the drawing in Fig. 9 is the same as the corresponding portion in Fig. 8, and thus the repeated description thereof is omitted here.

The difference between the conflict detection system 900 and the collision detection system 800 will be explained below.

In the first cycle, the power outage range determining means 920 determines a power outage range (referred to herein as the original grid power outage range) in a manner as used by the power outage range determining means 820. If the collision detecting device 930 determines that any device in the power-protecting device group is included in the original power-off range determined by the power-down range determining device 920, the collision detecting device 930 sends an alarm signal in addition to the similar collision detecting device 830. Further, the conflict is further transmitted to the power failure range determining means 920.

The power outage range determining device 920 changes the original grid power outage range by changing the switching states of some of the switches in the power grid (other than the switches that find the switches). Then, the conflict detecting means 930 determines whether each device received from the power-protecting device group is included in the changed power-off range of the power grid. The power failure range determining device 920 repeatedly changes the power failure range of the power grid, and the collision detecting device 930 repeatedly performs the determination until a power failure range of the power grid is found, so that each device located in the power conservation device group is not included in the power failure of the power grid. In the range, or until all switch state combinations are exhausted.

The conflict detection system 800 and the conflict detection system 900 operate at timings similar to the process flow 300 to perform the functions described above.

Although in the present invention, only the same relationship, the same position relationship, and the cross relationship are illustrated with respect to the geographical relationship, other geographical relationships related to maintenance and safety may be considered when deciding to accompany the power failure device. For example, it may be determined based on geographic coordinates whether there are other electrical devices that are too close to the device that needs to be maintained.

Those skilled in the art will appreciate that such embodiments of the invention can be provided in the form of a method, system, or computer program product. Accordingly, the invention may take the form of a purely hard embodiment, an embodiment of pure software, or an embodiment incorporating hardware and software. A typical combination of hardware and software can be a general purpose computer system with a computer program. When the program is loaded and executed, the computer system is controlled to perform the above method.

The present invention can be embedded in a computer program product, including all features that allow the method described herein to be implemented. The computer program product is included in one or more computer readable storage media (including but not limited to disk storage, compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), optical storage, etc. Etc.) The computer readable storage medium has computer readable program code stored therein.

The invention has been described with reference to flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of the methods, systems and computer program products according to the invention. It will be apparent that each block and combinations of such blocks in the flowcharts and/or block diagrams can be implemented by computer program instructions. Such computer program instructions may be provided to a general purpose computer, a special purpose computer, an embedded processor or other processor of a programmable data processing device to generate a machine for causing such instructions (by computer or other programmable The processor of the data processing device generates a means for implementing the functions provided by one or more of the blocks in the flowchart and/or block diagram.

The computer program instructions can also be stored in a readable memory of one or more computers, each memory in the memory indicating that the computer or other programmable data processing device is implemented in a particular manner, The instructions stored in the computer readable memory make a product. The product includes an instruction device that implements the functions provided by one or more of the blocks of the flowchart and/or block diagram.

The computer program instructions can also be loaded into one or more computers or other programmable data processing devices such that a series of operational steps are run on the computer or other programmable data processing device. A computer-implemented program is generated on each device of the device, such that the instructions executed on the device provide a method for implementing one or more of the blocks in the flowchart and/or block diagram These steps.

Although the principles of the invention have been described above in connection with the preferred embodiments of the invention, the description is intended to be illustrative only and not to be construed as limiting. Any changes and modifications may be made by those skilled in the art without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims.

300. . . Processing flow

310. . . step

320. . . step

330. . . step

340. . . step

600. . . Processing flow

610. . . step

620. . . step

630. . . step

640. . . step

650. . . step

800. . . Conflict detection system

810. . . Accompanying power failure analysis device

820. . . Power failure range determining device

830. . . Conflict detection device

900. . . Conflict detection system

910. . . Accompanying power failure analysis device

920. . . Power failure range determining device

930. . . Conflict detection device

The invention itself, its embodiments, other objects and advantages will be better understood by the following detailed description of exemplary embodiments, in which:

Figure 1 illustrates an example of a conflict between PSGR and OR occurring in the grid;

Figure 2 shows a sample of all PSGR and OR in a month in a table diagram;

Figure 3 is a flow chart showing one of the collision detecting methods according to the first embodiment of the present invention;

4 is a schematic diagram showing a power grid for explaining a collision detecting method according to a first embodiment of the present invention;

Figure 5 illustrates an example of one of three geographic relationships of electrical devices in a power grid;

Figure 6 is a flow chart showing one of the collision detecting methods according to the second embodiment of the present invention;

Figure 7 is a diagram showing a power grid for explaining a collision detecting method according to a second embodiment of the present invention;

Figure 8 illustrates a block diagram of a collision detection system in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention;

Figure 9 illustrates a block diagram of a collision detection system in accordance with another embodiment of the present invention.

The preferred methods and systems are described above with reference to the drawings, in which like reference numerals represent the like. In the above description, for the purposes of explanation, numerous specific details are set forth in order to facilitate a complete understanding of the system and method. In other instances, well-known structures and devices are shown in block diagram form for the purpose of illustration. Those skilled in the art will recognize many variations and other embodiments and have the benefits disclosed in the present specification and drawings. Therefore, it is understood that the invention is not limited to the specific embodiments disclosed, but the alternative embodiments are also included within the scope of the invention and the general inventive concept. Certain terms are used herein, but the use of such terms is used in a generic sense only and not for the purpose of limitation.

300. . . Processing flow

310. . . step

320. . . step

330. . . step

340. . . step

Claims (19)

A method for detecting a conflict between a power save request and a power outage request in a power grid, comprising the steps of: receiving a first power outage device group and a power save device group, wherein the first power outage device The group includes a power failure request device and the power protection device group includes a power conservation request device; determining, by using geographic information of the device located in the power grid, a second power outage device group, the second power failure device group including the first power outage device group And a power outage device that needs to be powered down with the device located in the first power outage device group; using topology information in the power grid to determine a power outage range, wherein all of the second power outage device group The device can power down the range; and detect whether each device in the group of power savers is included in the power outage range of the power grid to determine whether there is a conflict between the power save request and the power outage request. The method of claim 1, wherein the grid power outage range corresponds to a switch state combination of one of the respective switches in the grid. The method of claim 2, further comprising the step of: if each device located in the group of power conservation devices is not included in the power outage of the power grid In the surrounding area, the respective switches located in the power grid can perform power failure according to the power outage range of the power grid. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of issuing a conflict alert if the device located in the power saver group is included in the grid power outage range. The method of claim 2, further comprising the step a): if the device located in the power conservation device group is included in the power outage range of the power grid, the power grid power failure is changed by changing a switch state of a part of the switches located in the power grid. Change the power outage range of the grid. The method of claim 5, further comprising the step b) of determining whether each of the devices in the group of power savers is included in the changed grid outage range. The method of claim 6, further comprising the steps of: repeating steps a) and b) until a grid outage range is found such that each device located in the group of power savers is not included in the In the grid power outage range, or until all of these switch state combinations are exhausted. The method of claim 1, wherein the method is performed at a specific time point, the specific time point includes a power-on start timing, and a power-saving end The timing and the power-down start timing and the end timing between the power-on start timing and the power-on end timing. The method of claim 1, wherein the method is performed once a day. The method of claim 1, wherein the accompanying power outage device and the device located in the first power outage device group have at least one of the following geographic relationships: a co-rotation relationship, a co-location relationship, and a cross relationship. A system for detecting a conflict between a power save request and a power outage request in a power grid, comprising: a companion power failure analysis device for receiving a first power outage including a power outage request device a device group, and using a geographic information of a device located in the power grid to determine a second power outage device group, the second power outage device group including the device in the first power outage device group and the need to be located in the first power outage device group a power-off device with a power failure in the device; a power failure range determining device that uses topology information in the power grid to determine a power outage range, wherein all of the devices located in the second power outage device group can a power failure; and a collision detecting device for receiving a power saver group including the power save request device, and determining whether each device in the power save device group is included in the power grid outage range. The system of claim 11, wherein the grid power outage range corresponds to a switch state combination of one of the respective switches in the grid. The system of claim 12, wherein if each device located in the group of power conservation devices is not included in the power outage range of the power grid, the system can remotely control the remote location in the power grid according to the power outage range of the power grid. Switch to perform a power outage. The system of claim 11, wherein the system issues a conflict alert if the device located in the group of power savers is included in the power outage range of the grid. The system of claim 12, wherein if the device located in the power conservation device group is included in the power failure range of the power grid, the power failure range determining device changes a switching state of a part of the switches located in the power grid, thereby changing the power grid. Power outage range. The system of claim 15, wherein the conflict detecting means determines whether each of the devices in the group of power conservation devices is included in the changed power outage range; or wherein the power outage determining device repeatedly changes the a grid power outage range, and the conflict detection device repeatedly performs the determination until a grid power outage range is found such that each device located in the group of power savers is not included in the grid power outage range, or until all of the power outage is exhausted And other switch state combinations. The system of claim 11, wherein the system performs collision detection at a specific time point, the specific time point includes a power-on start sequence, a power-on end sequence, and a timing between the power-on start and The power failure start timing and the end timing between the power save end timings. The system of claim 11, wherein the system performs collision detection once a day. The system of claim 11, wherein the companion power outage device and the device located in the first power outage device group have at least one of the following geographic relationships: a co-rotation relationship, a co-location relationship, and a cross relationship.